![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was going through my '71 Topps inventory and noticed a color variation on card #512 - Red Sox rookies. The name blocks are usually red but I have a version that is clearly orange, similar to the color differences on the checklists. This card has probably been in my '71's since purchased from wax packs and doesn't appear to be sun bleached or otherwise artificially altered. Has anyone seen this variation before?
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Color variation like that is fairly common in cards from the 50s-90s. There are people that search sites to find cards with that much difference to buy. Then they lie and call them some extremely rare color variation when they list them for sale at a crazy inflated price.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Nice thing is that there was a red color pass, because you can see it in the Boston logo and Rawlings glove.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You also have to be careful on the "color" variations to see if the variation is a printing issue or one caused by too much exposure to light. Light can be either sunlight or light in stores, etc.
That does occur and in the past 20 years has definitely affected a bunch of autographed cards. Rich
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
That seems a bit harsh Ben, if PSA can recognize a small green smudge in the bottom of a baseball on the back of a 1961 card as a variation needed for a master set then who can blame sellers for trying to get ahead of the curve in recognizing future rare and valuable variations
![]() Who would think today that print defects like the 58 Herrer and 57 Bakep and 52 Campos would be worth big bucks ? Last edited by ALR-bishop; 02-11-2019 at 08:03 AM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I collect 1971 errors and freaks. This one is a misprint, missing some of the red. You might get a few bucks from a specialist in the set who collects print freaks, but not a big ticket item since it is a subtle error. Collectors prize the real FUBAR cards that are wrong no matter how you look at them:
![]()
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... Last edited by Exhibitman; 02-11-2019 at 12:12 PM. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Funny thing about the Brand card. Everything is triple registered. In addition to picture, text on border is blurred, but the signature is in tact. Wonder why.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Because the signature is just one color (black) so there is no other color pass to shift. Just my guess.
__________________
I'm always looking for t206's with purple numbers stamped on the back like the one in my avatar. The Great T206 Back Stamp Project: Click Here My Online Trading Site: Click Here Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running on-line collecting club www.oldbaseball.com My Humble Blog: Click Here |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Got it in one! |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ISO: 1971 Kellogg's Manny Sanguillen # 13 (323 Hit variation) | Ed_Hutchinson | 1960-1979 Baseball Cards B/S/T | 0 | 10-04-2018 05:01 PM |
New variation discovered in 1971 Topps | cardinalcollector | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 15 | 11-21-2017 09:21 AM |
1971 Topps Basketball and 1971 Topps Hockey Set | Blwilson2 | Basketball / Cricket / Tennis Cards Forum | 2 | 08-18-2014 08:23 PM |
FS: 1959 Topps Mays, Aaron, Koufax, 1971 Topps Blyleven RC PSA 6, 1952 Topps, Modern | orioles93 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 11-06-2013 10:59 AM |
FS 1971 Kellogg's #24 Siebert SO 1055 variation PSA 8 | JMANOS | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 03-21-2010 06:43 AM |